The Lobster (2015) Review

Lucas Versantvoort / 23 Oct 2015

As he sat in his theatre seat, he didn't know what to expect. He'd seen the trailer a few times, but it hadn't really told him enough to know what The Lobster was about besides that it featured a hotel for lonely people who'd be turned into animals if they didn't find a partner in time. He figured it'd be a satire on relationships and it turned out it was. He'd also find out The Lobster would be one of those films he'd never want to see again for the rest of his life.

The film started with a woman driving along the countryside in the rain. She pulled over and shot a donkey, then drove away, leaving the other donkey baffled and slowly waddling to the dead donkey. At first, he thought that it looked very realistic and anticipated a credits message that said no animals were harmed during the making of this picture. Then he got to thinking about the film's theme--people turning into animals--and he realized the donkey must've been her unfaithful husband or something. We then cut to David (Colin Farrell) entering The Hotel with his brother who stayed at the same hotel, but didn't find a partner and was turned into the animal of his choice. When asked what kind of animal he'd like to be, David replied, 'a lobster'. David is told how The Hotel works and so began his life there, searching for love.

After the film had concluded, he was left with a dilemma: he knew on the one hand this was quite a smart film, but also that the strength of its satire was also the source of its lack of likeability and lack of replay value. He knew the film was at its satirical best when it played with language. The characters would say what they meant and meant what they'd say, but the bluntness, straightforwardness and 'dry' way of conversing made it quite funny. It was all meant to parody every aspect of relationships, from conversational subjects to how we view each other, from how people select a suitable partner to the first flirtations. This film is almost merciless, he thought, merciless in how it dissects people and relationships. 

Yet, he thought, this type of satire comes at a price. Not only does it make the film come across as unlikable and lacking in replay value, this is exacerbated by the film's length which is too long for the film's subject matter and style. It's obvious the film's promoting healthy relationships (and all that entails) with its parodies, but you still have to sit through all of the director's Variations on a Theme, so to speak. And that ending. Ah, that nauseating ending. Regarding the ending, he thought to himself, 'you know, I remember a time when 'love hurts' referred to 'mental hurt', not physical hurt, but that's just me'. 

He didn't regret seeing The Lobster. At least, he thought he didn't. He had always valued honesty and authenticity above all else and that's what the film was going for in the end. By exaggerating and parodying the negative (e.g. unhealthy relationships), you emphasize the positive (e.g. healthy relationships). It's just that the film's repeating the same point over and over occasionally made the film a bit of a drag.

ps: if you're wondering about the writing style, then you obviously haven't seen The Lobster.